Blocked input tax credit for resort construction remains unavailable; interest follows actual utilisation, while delayed payment attracts statutory pe...
Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
HC held that the petitioner had committed a bona fide error by uploading the GSTIN of the Kerala branch of R-5 instead of its Chennai (Tamil Nadu) branch in GSTR-1, which prevented R-4 from availing Input Tax Credit. Relying on analogous precedents, HC observed that where no revenue loss occurs and the mistake is inadvertent, technicalities should not obstruct legitimate rectification. Given the serious disputes between the petitioner and R-4/R-5, HC kept all inter se contentions open. HC partly allowed the petition and directed R-1 to R-3 to permit the petitioner to amend the relevant GSTR-1 returns within four weeks from receipt of the order.
HC held that the petitioner had committed a bona fide error by uploading the GSTIN of the Kerala branch of R-5 instead of its Chennai (Tamil Nadu) branch in GSTR-1, which prevented R-4 from availing Input Tax Credit. Relying on analogous precedents, HC observed that where no revenue loss occurs and the mistake is inadvertent, technicalities should not obstruct legitimate rectification. Given the serious disputes between the petitioner and R-4/R-5, HC kept all inter se contentions open. HC partly allowed the petition and directed R-1 to R-3 to permit the petitioner to amend the relevant GSTR-1 returns within four weeks from receipt of the order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
